Excise/Custom

CBIC revises jurisdiction of customs officers for the purpose of appeals

CBIC revises jurisdiction of customs officers for appeals purposes in respect of bill of entry entered for home consumption or warehousing
 
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Revenue)
(CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS)

Notification No.63/2020-Customs (N.T.)

New Delhi, the 30th July, 2020
 
G.S.R.482(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 and sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) No. 92/2017-Customs (N.T.), dated the 28th September, 2017, namely:-
 
In the said notification, in paragraph 1, for the provisos, the following provisos shall be substituted,namely :-
 
“Provided that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bengaluru, shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against the serial nos.1, 5, and 6 of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 7 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act:
 
Provided further that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-1) Chennai and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-II) Chennai, shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 1 and 7 of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial nos. 5 and 6 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act:
 
Provided further that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Delhi, shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against the serial nos.5, 6, and 7of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial no.1 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act:
 
Provided further that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai-I shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 3 and 4 of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 2 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act:
 
Provided further that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai-II shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 2 and 4 of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 3 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act:
 
Provided further that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai-III, shall have jurisdiction in relation to an order or decision of the officers sub-ordinate to the officers as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 2 and 3 of the Table above, in respect of the bill of entry entered for home consumption under sub-section (1) of section 46 or for warehousing under section 68 of the said Act for goods imported at a customs station in the jurisdiction of the officer as mentioned in column (3) against serial no. 4 of the Table above and assigned to them electronically in the Customs Automated System for the purposes of sub-section (5) of section 17 and section 18 of the said Act”.
[F.No. 437/48/2014-Cus.IV]
 
ANANTH RATHAKRISHNAN, Dy. Secy. (Customs)
 
Note: The principal Notification No. 92/2017-Customs(N.T.),dated the 28th September, 2017, was published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide number G.S.R.1210(E), dated the 28th September, 2017, and was last amended by Notification No. 51/2020-Customs(N.T.),dated the 5th June 2020, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, vide number G.S.R.353(E) dated the 5th June, 2020.

Download Notification Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Government

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App not disproportionate – Delhi High Court

Temporarily blocking public access to Telegram App under section 69A of IT Act 2000 is not disproportionate - Delhi HC…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA

High Court explains the meaning of term ‘enterprise’ appearing in section 80IA to means a project or an undertaking owned…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash not owner who came up to own it

Addition deleted as assessee was only a carrier of cash and the real owner had come forward owning the cash…

5 days ago
  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

7 days ago
  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

1 week ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

2 weeks ago